Search This Blog

Subscribe to this blog

Follow by Email

Exposing Sexual Predators is Good, But…

The only thing that shocked most people
in the film industry about the Harvey Weinstein story was that suddenly, for
some reason, people seemed to care. That knowledge alone allowed a lot of us to
breathe for the first time in ages.

I’ve grown up in
this industry, surrounded by predatory behavior, and the idea of making people
care about it seemed as distant an ambition as pulling the sun out of the sky.

Polley’s testimony, among countless others, has saddened and
sickened me, though it also gives me hope. It appears that we as a society may
be growing more serious about dealing with sexual violence. Open secrets are
becoming more open and less secret, and that is good. I applaud the bravery of
women (and men) who have shared their #MeToo stories in an effort to affect
change.

At the same time, we must focus on more than just the
extreme examples of perversion if we are to see lasting results. We must acknowledge
that there are several (shall we say fifty?) shades of sexual violation that
need addressing, many of which are considered normal—even socially acceptable.

Because people don’t transition from prudent to predatory in
a single bound, we must also discern how these different shades of violation
can act like links in a chain. Otherwise, we will remain woefully confused as a
culture, condemning the last link in the chain while excusing, or even
encouraging, the other links. Or, to use a different analogy, we must not be like parents who teach their teenage drivers how to use an on-ramp (“Speed up to match the flow of traffic”), but then berate them for driving on the freeway (“Why are you going so fast?!”).

SEXUAL VIOLENCE IS A SPECTRUM

Consider the example of filmmaker Robert Rodriguez, who learned
from actress Rose McGowan that Harvey Weinstein had both raped and blacklisted
her. In response, Rodriguez offered her a starring role in his upcoming
Weinstein production, Planet Terror.
(This movie was designed as a throwback to earlier grindhouse films, which
often thrived on explicit sex and violence.) “We had a plan,” Rodriguez writes, “and more importantly, we had a mission. . . . Casting Rose in a
leading role in my next movie felt like the right move to make at the time – to
literally make [Weinstein] pay.”

To an extent, I can appreciate Rodriguez’s desire to somehow
right a horrible wrong. At the same time, his actions expose the shallow
understanding our culture has of what actually constitutes objectification. You
can’t effectively fight the private sexual exploitation of a woman by casting
that woman in a movie that utilizes, among other things, public sexual
exploitation.

McGowan herself came to a similar conclusion during a
Rolling Stone photo shoot promoting Planet
Terror. In a recent interview for Elle Magazine, she said how, while waiting to find out what her wardrobe
would be for the shoot, she had an awakening of sorts: “There was nothing on
the [clothing] rack except for two belts of bullets. I was like, where are the
clothes?”

It turns out that the cover photo for the magazine was
designed to show McGowan and fellow star Rosario Dawson posing mostly nude,
with only the belts of bullets draped over their chests. In a “moment of
clarity,” McGowan recognized her culpability in perpetuating male objectification
of women, and how it influences women to view themselves and others. As she put
it, “I was the thing set to make you feel like you weren’t quite good enough
and I was going to steal your boyfriend.” The thought now enrages her.

To be sure, there is a definite distinction between McGowan
being the victim of sexual assault and McGowan willingly participating in a
sexualized project. With that said, sexual exploitation can still exist even when consent is given by all parties. And if we truly wish
to combat powerful men who treat others as mere objects for their own pleasure,
we cannot dismiss other courses of action that encourage us to treat actors as
objects for our own pleasure.*

HOW SHOULD WE THEN LIVE?

While most of us may not wield the influence of a movie star
or producer, we are far from uninfluential. Just consider the example of former
child star Mara Wilson. In addressing the sexual objectification of actresses
from her own experience, she said, “The
people that were mostly a threat to me as a child were not Hollywood insiders,
but grown-up male ‘fans.’” And in a recent tweet,
she noted, “It’s not just executives doing sh--ty things. Sometimes, it’s
Viewers Like You.” Viewers can have an effect on those in the entertainment
industry, for good or for ill.

So what can viewers like us do to combat the societal
atrocities committed by men like Harvey Weinstein? How can we help reduce
incidents of sexual predation in our society? Below are four specific suggestions
for dealing with several links in the chain of sexual violence.

Don’t evaluate women as possible sex partners. This is what
Harvey Weinstein did. It’s what all sexual predators do. Don’t let
yourself off the hook simply because you lack the power and opportunity to
act out your selfish impulses. Contrary to what much of our pornified
entertainment may communicate, women aren’t standing around waiting for you
to mentally undress them and/or sexually interact with them. Their worth is
not based on the amount of real, potential, or imagined sexual pleasure they
can give. If we want fewer people acting
like Harvey Weinstein, we need fewer people thinking like Harvey Weinstein.

Don’t prioritize/emphasize others’ physical appearance. Praise
movie stars for their acting abilities, not for their hotness quotient.
Praise musicians for their artistry, not for how great they look gyrating
around half-naked. Praise the women in your life for elements of their
personhood they actually have control over—i.e., their accomplishments,
character qualities, personal growth, and so on. Judging others first and
foremost by their appearance turns a superficial issue into a
super-important issue, and it places an unreasonable and unbearable burden
on the shoulders of the women around you.

Refuse to excuse, accept, participate in, or promote sex as an
entertainment tool. Avoiding pornography and all forms of sex slavery are
obvious examples. But there are plenty of socially acceptable forms of
sexualized entertainment. To quote women’s rights advocate Caitlin Roper, “In media and advertising, women are routinely objectified and
dehumanized, reduced to a collection of sexualized body parts. It is near
impossible to escape the ubiquitous representations of women as sexually
available and existing for men’s use.” It may be near impossible to
escape, but it is not impossible to combat. Be an informed consumer.
Interact with popular culture—movies, TV shows, music, videogames,
advertising, etc.—in such a way that helps keep money away from products
and services that are voyeuristic, exploitative, and dehumanizing.

Similarly, make your entertainment choices pass the “golden rule”
test. Novelist Zachary Totah recently wrote the following: “Constantly surrounded as we are by entertainment
that shows, even encourages, sexual exploitation, it’s no wonder we live
in a society where #MeToo is a sad reality.” You can change that reality.
Let a love for your neighbors—including those whom you pay (directly or
indirectly) to entertain you—influence what forms of entertainment you
invest in. When appropriate, abstain from financially supporting sexual
exploitation as entertainment, even if it comes in the package of a summer
blockbuster, a chart-topping musical album, a record-breaking video game,
or a prestigious Oscar contender. Yes, the “golden rule” test will limit your choices. But someone else’s physical, spiritual, and emotional degradation
is a horrible price to pay for your freedom of choice.

HOPE BIG OR GO HOME

Near the end of her New York Times article, Sarah Polley
says this: “I hope that the ways in which women are degraded, both obvious and
subtle, begin to seem like a thing of the past.”

I hope so too. If that hope is to become a reality, our
attention cannot be limited to sexual assault alone. We must fight both obvious
and subtle forms of exploitation. We
must address the routine, everyday, “normal” ways in which we violate the
dignity of our fellow human beings. Then, and only then, will we be better positioned
to uproot the shoots of sexual aggression that are growing in society around
us—and in our own hearts.

Harvey Weinstein’s downfall was just the beginning. It’s a good beginning, but we still have a long way to go.* It’s also interesting to
note that during the filming of Planet Terror,
Rodrigues began an adulterous relationship with McGowan, leading to the
destruction of his marriage. Obviously, his view of what truly serves and
honors and cherishes women (and, most importantly, his wife) was sorely
lacking.UPDATE: this article was expanded on 1/11/18 to reflect further revelations Rose McGowan made regarding her experience promoting the movie Planet Terror.photo credit: Rubenstein via flickr, CC

Most Popular Posts

The first assault against Jennifer
Lawrence was heavily discussed in the news and on social media. The second has received
comparatively little fanfare. The first incident resulted in an FBI
investigation, subsequent prosecution, and an upcoming sentencing. The legal ramifications of the second incident are practically
nonexistent. The overall response to the first was outrage. The response to the
second was indifference.

What were these two incidents? The
first, as you may have guessed, was the 2014 iCloud hack in which private/nude photos of several female celebrities, including
Lawrence, were stolen and published online. The second incident involved the
filming of Jennifer Lawrence’s first sex scene (for the sci-fi movie Passengers). Let me set the stage by
sharing three similarities between the photo hack and the sex scene.
First, in the aftermath of the photo hack, Lawrence experienced anxiety. “I was
just so afraid,” she later said. “I didn’t know how this would affect my caree…

Several years ago, Kate Beckinsale
was conned into signing a movie contract that required nudity—something she
didn’t want to do. With her acting career in jeopardy, she found herself
browbeaten by the director. “I was really disturbed and I was sobbing and
begging,” she said.
At long last, she gave in to intimidation and performed the nude scene, which
made her feel
“violated and horrible.” Afterwards, she secretly urinated in
the director’s thermos in revenge.

In more recent history, one
actress from the HBO show Game of Thrones mustered up the courage to refuse doing any more nude
scenes. She is reported as saying
that she wants to be known for her acting, not for her body parts. (It’s a
sorry state of affairs that requires such a statement to be made in the first
place.) When the show started, she didn’t have nearly enough clout to buck the
system. A season of the show’s overwhelming popularity may have been what put
her in a better position to bargain with the producers. Would yo…

If you’re a fan of the 2014 film God’s Not Dead, and if you’re excited
about its upcoming sequel, you and I probably have several things in common. We
likely agree that historic Christianity is becoming less and acceptable in the
public sphere. We likely agree that many of our nation’s college campuses are
becoming more and more hostile to individuals who adhere to any form of
absolutes. We also likely agree that there is an increasing need for believers
of all types—students, teachers, pastors, filmmakers, etc.—to engage with our world
in an effective and countercultural way. It’s actually because of these
shared beliefs that I’m majorly concerned with the popularity of God’s Not Dead (and other movies like
it). And it’s because of these shared beliefs that I want to explain my concerns to you. I’ll put aside most of the
artistic issues I have with the film. (For that, I’ll direct you to my cyber
friends Steven D. Greydanus and Peter T. Chattaway). My main focus here will be on the mov…

* CONTENT ADVISORY: This topic requires a certain level of
frankness that may be inappropriate for some readers. While I have taken great
pains to avoid titillation, reader discretion is still advised. * Last week, we looked at the four main ways in which motion picture sex scenes and pornography are different.
Now I want to show how these factors actually prove to condemn Hollywood’s
methods rather than excuse them. Argument #1: There is often a difference in production
values. Motion pictures are a form of art, whereas porn is unabashed
titillation. Hollywood’s mash-up of blatant
sexuality (nudity and sex scenes) and aesthetics only serves to make its
displays of sex more alluring to the viewer. As supposed works of art,
Hollywood films are concerned with giving their audiences pleasure through
beauty. That’s what aesthetics are all about. What is ultimately more alluring:
a sex scene with bad lighting, poor audio quality, and shoddy production work,
or a sex scene with good composition…

So there I was, surrounded by church members, my pants wet,
my blood boiling. This wasn’t what I needed—at least, that’s what I told
myself.

The morning had started innocently enough. Shannon and I
arrived at our church building later than normal. Because of the pouring rain
and the packed parking lot, I said I would drop Shannon off at the front and then
go park and bring our Bibles and notebooks in. (After all, with an umbrella and
a raincoat at my disposal, my trek across the parking lot wouldn’t be too bad.)
Shannon didn’t want me lugging the books in the rain, so she
grabbed them before heading into the building. I then parked near the back of
the lot and reached for the umbrella.
It wasn’t there. Not in the back seat…not in the front seat.
Not anywhere. Shannon must have taken it inside with her.
Okay. No big deal. I still had my raincoat, and thanks to my
memory of a once-watched YouTube video, I had learned the trick to staying relatively
dry while traveling in the rain: wal…

Yes, I am
still on a Greatest Showman kick. Cut
me some slack, though. My wife and I only saw it for the first time just under
three weeks ago. The soundtrack still plays almost daily in our home, providing
near endless opportunities for our toddlers to daintily prance and spin as they
sing along with “The Circus Man” (as they gleefully call him). Besides, for
someone who’s as unhip as myself, it makes sense that I would be taken in by
such an uncool (according to critics), and yet wildly popular (according to general audiences), movie.

So, what
is my point in writing another post about this particular film? To gush like a
fanboy who has staked a personal claim to gold-encrusted, front-row seats on
the Greatest Showman bandwagon? Not exactly.
(That’s just a happy side effect.) The point of this blog post is to…well,
point out a unique aspect of the song “A Million Dreams.” After listening to this
song a bajillion times (give or take a few), I’ve noticed something
extraordinary about i…

I recently read through Genesis 15, where God reassures Abram, who is currently childless, that he will have numerous descendants (which God had initially promised in Genesis 12:1-3). Abram’s response leads to something amazing: “And he believed in the LORD, and He accounted it to him for righteousness” (Genesis 15:6).

Commenting on this verse, Martin Luther says, “Righteousness is nothing else than believing God when He makes a promise.” The anti-intuitive nature of this statement struck me forcefully. You see, I am unconsciously inclined to think that my striving hard to do well is the kind of righteousness that pleases God. When I obey a particular law, do a good deed, or reject a temptation, then I have earned at least a small degree of God’s favor. But that is not how it works.

God definitely blesses our faith-inspired efforts, but such efforts are…well, based on faith—that is, confidence in God’s promise to pardon and accept me through Christ’s atoning work. If I attempt to som…

Last week, we looked at
Hollywood’s underground culture of sexual
abuse: how actors are routinely coerced into violating their consciences by
performing nude scenes and/or sex acts on screen. While audiences have grown
comfortable with watching such scenes, actors are often uncomfortable (or
worse) with filming them.

Isn’t it true, though, that some actors
willingly undress for the camera? The simple answer is, of course, yes. But
it’s an answer that requires at least two clarifications. And since women are
the majority of the victims in these circumstances, we’ll focus on women for
the rest of the article. First, it’s not as easy as you
might think to discern the difference between willing and unwilling
performances. Take just one example (or, rather, an example in several parts)
from recent history, all involving a “willing participant.” Actress Margot Robbie recounts
how her audition went for the movie The
Wolf of Wall Street. She showed up for the audition in her usual
look: jeans …

Your argument robs adult women of
agency because it says outright that they
are not consenting and implies they
cannot consent. It infantilizes adult women and asserts that they can only
be protected by men with a white knight impulse. We’re getting into an area
where women are regarded as little more than sheep, being led by whatever crook
is nearest.
As regular visitors know, over the past few years I have
focused much of my blog’s attention on how the entertainment industry places
pressure on actors to perform nude and/or sex scenes for audiences. It’s a
problem that is at once both tacitly acknowledged and blithely ignored. I have
argued further that those who suffer most under this burden are actresses.
With my emphasis on women, some readers have responded with
major concerns. I am both thankful for and alarmed by this feedback, because
the quoted critique above is not what I have meant to communicate. Not at all. I
offered a …

Let me tell you about a film that’s garnered a lot of
publicity. The story revolves around a wealthy and debonair businessman with
serious control issues. His sexual tastes involve perverse fantasies, but he
gets what he wants because he’s rich, powerful, and handsome. In telling this
story, the movie doesn’t shy away from depictions of the sex act. The audience
is inundated with sex, in fact. The debauchery is enough to make a lot of
people sick, either with revulsion, pleasure, or a mixture of both.

Do you think I’m talking about Fifty Shades of Grey? Actually, I’m referring to The Wolf of Wall Street, which came out on
DVD just last year.
Many prominent Christian critics loved WoWS, as I pointed out earlier. Fifty Shades of Grey,
on the other hand, has been either ignored or condemned. And yet there are some
glaring similarities in how both movies handle sex.
They both employ stylistic techniques that were labeled as hardcore porn just a few decades
ago. These techniques involve …